Reading this novel is like floating lazily down the inlets that Mark and Jim patrol with cotton-plugged ears, mourner's veil, and sinus infection thatReading this novel is like floating lazily down the inlets that Mark and Jim patrol with cotton-plugged ears, mourner's veil, and sinus infection that has rendered you incapable of smell or taste. It's a quick read wrapped up with a few mawkish winks. I pray to all the divine beings everywhere that any middle-schooler assigned to read this book gives Native American literature by Native Americans a chance. The themes skimmed over in "I Heard the Owl Call My Name" - specially the notions of what holds meaning and endures in times of change, death and dying, be that of a way of life or the body - are masterfully pondered with grace, humor, and emotional depth by Native American authors such as Louise Erdrich and Sherman Alexie, who are exceptional and accessible. ...more

This is one long book and I wanted more. Not more pages. More poetry. And way more salaciousness. Alas, Nancy Milford is a patient professional who caThis is one long book and I wanted more. Not more pages. More poetry. And way more salaciousness. Alas, Nancy Milford is a patient professional who carefully presents well-documented facts with little innuendo.

The story of Edna is beyond fascinating. This sort-of homely girl from Maine uses her mind and ability to pierce through people's facades to seduce her way through life. But there's so much more to the story. She works hard and deserves her successes. She loves to be loved, cares to be cared for. She can never escape the ingrained fear of destitution and abandonment suffered throughout her childhood. But she also never seems to let go of the wild passion that fills a certain set of intelligent young children. Through her poetry, we see how she eventually tames this sharp pastoral ardor into sometimes subtly bold plays and poems and other writings that touch upon the here and now of her time.

And then there is her mother, her sisters, her friendships, her dalliances, her addictions, sadness, her savage fiery-red beauty.

I'm usually a fan of Lonely Planet guide books, but this one was very disappointing. It's very smug. It only gives phrases in Ukrainian, though RussiaI'm usually a fan of Lonely Planet guide books, but this one was very disappointing. It's very smug. It only gives phrases in Ukrainian, though Russian is widely used. And it leaves out important basics: don't get your own at kiosks, to get [here], take a left outside of Metro and walk 15 minutes, go underground to cross street, etc. Spent most of the time in Kiev. I was disappointed with a lot of the suggestions.

All said, this was the best Ukraine guide book we could find. Plus, 'change' and 'development' are juggernauts -- beasts in themselves -- in Ukraine. I'm sure it's a challenge to write a proper guide in a place evolving so quickly.

My suggestion: head online. Visit the travel boards, Lonely Planet has one. Read up on other people's recent travels and post questions before you go. Once there, try to connect with the locals and get suggestions. When back, post then post some more about your experience. (Although, I haven't been good about this.)...more

Maeda presents his laws of simplicity. I didn't find the book particularly groundbreaking nor very entertaining. Despite this, I still think it's wortMaeda presents his laws of simplicity. I didn't find the book particularly groundbreaking nor very entertaining. Despite this, I still think it's worth reading if you struggle for a sense of simplicity in your work or life. Alternatively, why not head over to www.lawsofsimplicity.com and save the cost of the book? Seriously, Maeda won't mind; he plugs the site every chance he gets throughout the purposefully scant 100 pages. ...more

I enjoyed this collection much better than last year's. I did skip Kolbert's and Broad's respective pieces - I need a long break from the global warmiI enjoyed this collection much better than last year's. I did skip Kolbert's and Broad's respective pieces - I need a long break from the global warming debates unless they're strikingly different. I also passed over Gawande's "The Score" having read "Better", in which it appears, and having just re-read this very essay (given to me by my obgyn)right before I got to it in the series. I did happily re-read the piece on Face Blindness. Fascinating. The biggest standout for me, however, was Matthew Chapman's "God or Gorilla." I laughed out loud throughout the essay. Chapman, kind of like David Sedaris, is a master observer who repaints scenes and analyzes 'characters' with stinging wit. ...more

It took me a while to get into this book. The bare bones writing style felt cold and pretentious at first. Ironic I suppose. But Feynman gets naked anIt took me a while to get into this book. The bare bones writing style felt cold and pretentious at first. Ironic I suppose. But Feynman gets naked and shines because that's just who he is. Eventually I was laughing out loud and fighting urges to find bongos. (book suggested by MdM) ...more

**spoiler alert** Plodding. But worth reading. Bryson seemed to give up the moment he thought to hike the AT, well before Gatlinburg. I'm glad I didn'**spoiler alert** Plodding. But worth reading. Bryson seemed to give up the moment he thought to hike the AT, well before Gatlinburg. I'm glad I didn't give up on this often dull read though. What it lacks in outdoor adventure excitement it makes up for in interesting facts about the lay of the land and the fragile ever-changing, often-ravaged environment. There's a fire brewing beneath us indeed.

Without Katz I may have given up.

Yes Bryson delivers wry lines that make you chuckle out loud. Truthfully, if he was a through-and-through Brit, I probably would have laughed harder. I just kept thinking that any of my outdoorsy book club friends could have done a better job on all accounts.

2.5 stars. 3 stars if you're a couch environmentalist b/c this may be the fire ants down the trousers you need to get you going and doing. ...more

I'd love to have Murakami and David Lynch over for some pasta and pie. I firmly believe that the conversation would be so staggering that my kitchen wI'd love to have Murakami and David Lynch over for some pasta and pie. I firmly believe that the conversation would be so staggering that my kitchen would implode.

The Elephant Vanishes was my first taste of Murakami, and it left me mesmerized. Murakami has a genius way of weaving grounded reality with the unearthly. I almost feel like he's personifying psychological processes. It's not just for show. Beyond the often dark undertones I always find hope. Sure, his characters may not always realize the hope, but the glimpses are there for the readers to notice and hold on to. Plus, he's just fun or moving or eerily captivating. It makes for entertaining reading.

You'll find elements and passages from these collected short stories in his novels. Personally, I think it's just another reason why this collection makes for a great introduction to the author.

**spoiler alert** First of, I thought the book was a laugh out loud romp. Read in historical context, I imagine it was quite salacious.

The quote, "whe**spoiler alert** First of, I thought the book was a laugh out loud romp. Read in historical context, I imagine it was quite salacious.

The quote, "where would your good be if there were no evil, and what would the world look like without shadows," reminded me of Ken Wilber's "No Boundary," which elucidates the notion of unified opposites found in Eastern, Western and mystical philosophies and even physics. (The kind of pompous coed stuff I enjoyed in my pompous coed days.) One point is that we try to pull apart dichotomies that exist only within their coexistence. Once pulled apart it's too easy to classify things as dark and light, bad and good. And that's too simple.

I certainly think Bulgakov was purposefully toying with this concept of unified opposites. Moreover, I think it's another jab, a string that ties that entire satire together that states we our own worst enemies. The idea of self oppression runs throughout.

To me, the book is a critique of Stalinist Russia, specifically the people, more specifically, the intelligentsia. I feel that to Bulgakov, the government regime is too obvious a target, too often the cop out. Basically, he's saying, you fools, you'd rather live in a state of mass hypnosis; you'd rather succumb to both external AND self-inflicted, internal oppression, than stand up together against the regime.

Bulgakov seems to avoid innocents in the book. There are no children, said the ghost of the suffocated baby, and there are no uneducated, said maybe that woman with the oil that spills and kills Beroliz. Yet, in the apartment scene where she steals the brooch, she isn't tormented with the parties mystic mischievousness. She's sort of let off the hook. Those that are challenged, and I argue nothing too evil beyond facing the truth personified (body-less working suit, a big pig, etc.), ever happens in the book, are highly educated, and one imagines, quite capable of a pulling together in the name of HOPE and CHANGE (shameless Obama plug). Anyway, the writers and artists (Bulgakov's contemporaries) do nothing but loll about and party. Aren't the writers the ones who are supposed to stir the uprising?

There is so much to say about the book. Obviously. A few other things to put out there:

Jesus and Woland seem to coexist and exhibit deference for one another. Both are more powerful than the other characters, I'd say, in their ability to face and live their lives openly.Matthew and the Master (the scribes) bridge and tie together the storylines (as does the calendar year). I suppose the Master is Bulgakov? The character of Master wasn't that appealing to me beyond the fact that he did go ahead and put his work out there and faced the consequences (bad reviews! And, well, detainment). But, until Magarita's gift from Woland, Master was content to stay self-detained in the asylum.

I find many parallels in Margarita and Pilate. Both are tormented by their place and desire something else but are too afraid, at first, to break free and do anything. Pilate wants intellectual liberation. And Margarita wants the liberation of love. (I also like Margarita's lady – who wants sexual/visceral liberation).I didn't like Margarita at first. She was a bit too pity-party for me.

It took me so long to get into the meta-storyline, but I really dug Pilate. He may be my favorite character. Here's this powerful guy with a stressful job as a feared ball breaker. The job is just killing him. He's surrounded by kind of lame people. All he wants is to relax with his dog and have a drink and a decent intellectual conversation with someone. He tries to spare Jesus by pointing out that he really didn't do anything and by giving them a much much worse choice to set free. But of course they go for the murdering, rapist over the outsider.

I find the end very interesting. Pilate lives in a (mystic) purgatory and finally achieve his nirvana – he walks to moonbeam to the stars alongside his dog and Jesus. Ah. And Margarita too breaks free from her purgatory (that big beautiful house and wealth but no love) and flies off with Woland and his retinue into the night. Are they equally rewarded, forgiven or what have you? I suppose that depends on how we view dark and light?

One scene that I still think of is the dream sequence where people are supposed to give up their hidden currency. I wonder why the men and women were separated? What is Bulgakov saying there?

Does anyone think the ending would read and feel differently if Bulgakov finished it himself rather than his wife?

I thought this was going to be a somber read full of depraved characters. Whatevs reviewers. I found Matt's family all quite likable and sweet. It's aI thought this was going to be a somber read full of depraved characters. Whatevs reviewers. I found Matt's family all quite likable and sweet. It's as if we join them at the end of any wickedness and well-into the all's-forgiven, new page days. Here's to family, forgiving, holding on to the good and letting go of the bad, and gentle waves breaking on soft sands. And to books that aren't very deep or complicated or half bad. ...more

It's complicated. I didn't enjoy this book. I get why so many respectable literary folks have sung it's praises. For a brief moment I wondered if me tIt's complicated. I didn't enjoy this book. I get why so many respectable literary folks have sung it's praises. For a brief moment I wondered if me thirteen years ago would have found it heady. Would I have overlooked the annoying instances of paragraphs filled with the same sentence, only slightly altered? The last paragraph. Eek. Maybe. Maybe I'd get all douchey and argue it was part of the circular "technique" that pervades the narrative and not some lazy, I like they way they all sound and I can't pick, oversight.

So, rather than just straight up agree with my book club buddies Tim and Jacob, which I do, I've decided to regress back a couple decades and play the bright-eyed college geek. How would I argue the worthiness of this book? I'd get all obnoxiously psychoanalytic.

Sepha is a man-child stuck. He actively tries to live without feeling, without doing more than he needs to in order to just be. He's haunted by his last go at ambition, which led to the beating death of his father before his eyes. There's the whole Dante's Inferno, will he won't he escape this self-inflicted / society-imposed limbo in Logan Circle of hell, hope, no hell, whatever. The Brother's Karamazov I'm not worthy to be my father's son, shit I killed my father, damn, we can really fuck up our kids stuff. There's the house, beautiful American dream can you make me feel any more shitty about my have-not status new neighbor, Naomi prison, that Judy built. Let's not forget that Sepha is state side because he was sent away, not because he wanted to go. Then there's Naomi, a 200-page thesis I have no time nor desire right now to address.

Man, but that last paragraph really sucked for me. Am I to believe there's a new spark? Didn't we just spend endless pages watching him run after finding out there's no way in hell, pun intended, he can pay? Ugh, Sisyphus, Sepha Stephanos.

You should definitely read this if you're into American Literature, concepts of American identity, psychology of identity, psychological ramifications of trauma, Dostoyevsky.

**spoiler alert** Reading this book was meditative for me. I find games such as chess and go relaxing and invigorating. They force you to clear your h**spoiler alert** Reading this book was meditative for me. I find games such as chess and go relaxing and invigorating. They force you to clear your head of extraneous noise while still thinking creatively, strategically and abstractly. I would argue, however, that having a good read on your opponent is also part of play.

The Master would disagree. As a newspaper journalist, the narrator would like to think he disagrees, but really doesn't. And Otake is too consumed to even digest the thought. I'll give him 15 years, if his constitution holds that long.

Maybe I've fallen into one of the books traps?

Again, I consider the book a meditative exercise. We're posed with many temptations to find and ruminate on dichotomies in opposition. Yes, there seems to be a lot at play here: old vs. new, the old lonely man vs. the young family man, the end of a traditional way vs. the beginning of a new way, the world and war off in the distance vs. the sealed in calm at the inns, the narrator as part of the tale rather just the teller.

But I found no good versus evil, no better way versus worse, no black versus white. The legend, like everyone, passes and the din of life continues. I found balance in the flow of the game, knowing that all is equally part of the play and equally not the heart of the matter. We're all invited to be the master of go and loose our selves in the beauty of being knowing that it'll never be perfect, we'll never truly win, or loose, and therein lies the beauty. ...more